It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Which was the Greatest Fighting force ever, Romans, Greeks,Mongols, Or the present USA.

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 01:56 PM
Narrowed down to periods in history.

Ancient to late medieval:
The Roman Empire, (after the reforms of Gaius Marius)
The Mongols under Genghis Khan

Renaissance to industrial revolution:
The Royal Navy

Pre-Modern Era:
Hate to say it, but the WW2 German Wehrmacht.

But for sheer all round arse-kicking ability, id have to say......The Mongols

Modern armies have only just acheived what the mongols did in thier day....

-MOBILITY: The entire army was cavalry based, due to the nomadic herdsman lifestyle in their homeland. Not just a few wings, the whole bloody lot of em. They could move and attack in full force much quicker and over much longer ranges than infantry based opponents.

-SKILL AT ARMS: Each individual was, raised from childhood, an exceptional horseman and archer (bows with draw weights equal to the Welsh longbow). They trained incessantly, were supremely fit, well trained in melee/hand to hand combat and were drilled endlessly in tactics at a squad level. Some skill base!

ADAPTABILITY: Gengis Khan reugularly recruited engineers and craftmen from defeated enemies, if they could give him a combat advantage. They were brought on board to teach the army techniques in engineering and seige warfare, besisdes other things, and they took to it remarkably well. If an idea clearly worked, the mongols had no trouble in using it themselves. A remarkable lack of dogma. More than could be said of the allied generals of world war one.

COMMAND STRUCTRE: A clear and coherent system of formations in ascending multiples of ten. A clear comand heirarchy. Also a strict meritocracy. You only advanced through the ranks if you were damn good at your job and had the respect of your men. No noble-born, inbred prince-generals. This was an army by soldiers, for soldiers.

posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 12:00 PM
well if you look at the first three compaired i would have to go (hands down) greeks led by none other then Alexander the Great. i mean come on even the Romans!! the mighty Romans modified his tactics to suit them. the phalanx was the base of the the Roman maniple and that was what made the extensive roman empire. when you look at the inspiration that Alexander the Great gave to Rome's greatest leaders Ceaser, he saw a bust of Alexander and thought to him self at my age he had conquered aolmost the whole known world. he was then spurred on to be the the leader we know him as now. Even Augustas went to visit Alexanders body and accendentally broke his nose while laying a wreath on him. Caligula even took Alexanders breast armor back to Rome with him. and Pompey rummaged through the closets of the lands he conqured for Alexanders 200+ year old cloak to wear. so we see the Romans were fancinated with him. and i mean 11 years of fighting not one single loss!!!!!!!!!! who can claim that??? the Mongols well as they were a terrible force in battle no question about that. i dont believe that they would have been able to do to the Roman Empire what they did if it had been at its peak. i am 100% sure the Romans would have done what the always did adapt and over come. however when you go to Rome and Greece??? i would again have to side with Greece as with out Alexanders insight on how to not only acchieve a victory but to use it as well i dont believe the romans would have been the fighting force they became. however you really can not compare them if you really think about it cause let us say that alexander had come along earlier before the persians had repressed the egyptians, do you think they would have welcomed him with open arms like they did??? most likely not so i think that each was superior to the other in its own time.

posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 12:21 PM
reply to post by TheSilentProtagonist

You left out on critcal advantage the mongols had - tech. Oh sure, they were rough horsemen that came sweeping down from the middle of nowhere. But in their hands they held one of (if not the) finest weapon of its day. The mongol bow.

The Mongolian Bow

One piece of equipment that was of great significance in war as well as in the daily life of the Mongols was their composite bow. Perhaps this bow is not quite as well-known in the West as the classical English longbow, which was the best bow ever to emerge in Europe.

Yet the Old Mongolian bow was incomparably superior to everything seen in the West. Not until the advent of breach-loading firearms in the 1800's was the Mongolian bow decisively surpassed as a long-range shooting tool. Still the original Mongolian bow remains a formidable tool for targeting, war or hunting, and the people around the Bajkal sea regularly used these bows for hunting at least up to the twentieth century.

Their bows provided them with unmatched range and power with little effective counter Combine that with the other factors listed and you have a force that proved pretty much unstoppable.

IMO on key to many of the great amrys and generals mentioned in this thread is that most of them took the fullest advantage of tech. as possible.

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:40 AM
I Would Have To Say The Spartans . They Had A Great Fighting Formation And Their Entire Lives Were Primarily About Combat . They Trained Since They Were What ? 6 Years Old !? On Top Of That They Were So Brutall And Skillfull In The Art Of Combat That They Held Back Thousands Of Persians With A Mere 300 Soldiers .

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 08:36 AM
This is an interesting debate and it is very hard to determine what fighting force is stronger than the other? However each fighting force had what it took to conquer during their time of history. It is very difficult to to side one against the other. One army that has been left out of the discussion is the Ottoman Turks, and they conquered practically all of Eastern Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East and successfully administered their empire until the end of WWI. I thought I would mentioned them because they earned their place in this discussion.

Now to my choice, it would have to be the Mongols. Their skill on horseback was unbelievable and virtually unstoppable. As a nomadic culture their sons practically live on horseback until maturity. A skilled cavalry proved to be the deciding factor against the lumbering armies of the 11th century and onward. To put things in perspective the Mongols conquered all of China (not by Ghenghis but his grandson Kublai in making his grandfather's dream a reality), India, the Stans, the Middle East, Russia, and almost all of Europe. Unfortunately, the Mongols withdrew at the gates of Vienna because a Khan died back east, and according to Mongol custom, the general of the army had to return to appoint a new ruler and the army withdrew shortly thereafter. Imagine if this miracle didn't happen, Europe most likely would have been under the boot of the Mongol. If memory serves, the only nation that withstood the Mongol invasion was the Vietnamese and they got bogged down like the United States 500 years later.

So hands down, the Mongols were a force to be reckoned with and above all armies before them. Just to put it into perspective, a bunch of nomads conquering the entire known world defies all reality, but history proves that it is possible. Nothing against the Roman Legions, Ottomans, British Empire, Weurmacht, Alexander and his phalanx, the Spartans, ect . . . just so many formidable armies of history.

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Jakes51]

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 09:19 AM
Timur forces...captured Ottoman Sultan Bayezid and kept him in a cage for his personal amusement.

...captured and sacked Delhi.

...captured Moscow.

...subjugated everthing in between; used to sack Baghdad as a weekend hobby and used the Koran as toilet paper.

died on his way to China, as a legacy left the Moguls who ruled India for 250 years after his death.

When his grave was opened in 1941...some will say that it was his demons that possessed the Germans and moved them to invade Russia.

When his statues were erected in Uzbekistan in 2005...Demons of War were unleashed upon the World. As an individual he probably had the most real impact on both the Ancient and Modern world. Timur is violent warfare manifest and their are none like him. He truely indulged along the path of Cain.

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 09:30 AM
Question is, what's the definition of greatest fighting force? in practice of results or in theory [man/fire power]?
Its strange nobody actually mentioned the Soviet Union, with their influence[mostly Asia/East Europe ]and man-and fire power their empire was maybe even bigger then that of Dzjengis Khan..
If it wasnt for The M.A.D and the nukes they would have conquered the whole of Europe and Asia and more..
But yes the British Empire was bigger then that of Dzjengis Khan, the difference is the British was a hegemony based on the controling of world trade, others you mention were really autocratic empires..
Though i have most respect for the Spartans, the ultimate breed of warriors..

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Foppezao]

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 10:51 AM
The greatest fighting force in history... Surely the British Armed Forces circa 1700-1900 must be involved in the conversastion.. they did conquer a 1/3 of the earth, not just the known earth, but the whole earth.. Notable Victories: Blenheim, Culloden, Plassey, Quebec, Aboukir Bay, Trafalgar, Waterloo, and Tel el Kebir. "The sun never sets on the british empire" These victories led to british domination of world affairs for hundreds of years..

The Americans in World War II were practically unbeatable.. we had better trained, better equipped men with less losses than any of our allies in the war.. the only setback i can think of would be Kasserine Pass, Anzio, Monte Cassino, and the "Bulge". But even those were only temporary setbacks.. I dont count Pearl Harbor because we were not at war yet until that very moment.. every island we invaded, we took.. World War II saw america rise to Superpower status.

My Wild Card would be the Afghans... Notable Victories: ( Massacre of Elphinstone's Army, Gandamak, Maiwand, 3rd Anglo-Afghan War, ) ( Khost, Panjsher, Maravar, 1st Zhawar, Jaji, Arghandab, Op. Arrow, Soviet Withdrawl,) ( Op. Red Wing, Op. Mountain Thrust, Op. Kaika, Op. Kamin, Sarposa Prison, Wanat, Uzbin Valley, and Balamorghab ). I might not otherwise put them on here except all of these victories were won against the dominant world power of the time and they ultimately won the wars as well.. The first set being against the British Empire, The second set against the Soviet Union and the third against the United States/NATO... mind you they havent won the current war yet, 8 years and going, neither have we.. They certainly deserve some recognition i think..

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by IDK88

Good mention of Timur or Tamerlane as he is called in the West. He was a vicious and ruthless leader that laid waste to much of the known world. He hailed from the lineage of the Mongol armies that invaded the central Asian steppes generations before. I know of the man and it is interesting the legend surrounding the exhumation of his tomb by Soviet anthropologist Mikhail Gerasimov during the Second World War.

It is said that when Gerasimov exhumed the body, an additional inscription inside the casket was found reading "Whosoever opens my tomb shall unleash an invader more terrible than I."[30] In any case, within hours after Gerasimov had begun the exhumation, Nazi Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, its invasion of the U.S.S.R.[31]

I'm not superstitious, but the coincidence is striking and that after opening the tomb; the dogs of war were unleashed on the Soviet Union. There is another stark coincidence surrounding his reburial.

Timur was re-buried with full Islamic ritual in November 1942 just before the Soviet victory at the Battle of Stalingrad (ref Marozzi 2004)

This man was a very interesting historical figure and he would even make his Mongolian ancestors blush at the sight of his savagery.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by JADESTONE

America is the best fighting force.In irak 4000 soldiers killed a million of the enemy.we have 128000 nukes.w can destroy the whole planet.we can fire a nuke every SECOND AND STILL HAVE 28000 LEFT FOR TOMORROW.

we have more powar then god.

posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 05:45 PM
The British of course we have had the biggest Empire ever. Britain educated a lot of countries as well and we have had a thousand inventions.

Scotland namely Pennisillin, Tv, Golf, Rugby, Telephone and most important Whisky :-)

Most of the American Presidents can trace their ancestory back to Scotland Via Northern Ireland

posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 09:46 PM
In the ancient world there were so many effective fighting forces that it would be impossible to pick any one.
The romans
The cartheginians
The army of alexander
The armies of first chinese emporers
the persians
are just a few that deserve recognition.

After ther fall of the roman empire
youd have to include the barbarians, after all they did conquer the mighty roman empire
The arabs, spreading islam.
I am hesitant to include the mongols, because an argument can be made that they never really defeated many of thier conquests.
Within 15 years of conquering the chinese, the mongols had become chinese, for all intents and purposes.
within 10 years of "conquering" the islamic kingdoms they had become muslim and had adpoted the ways of the people they conquered.
In the time of ghengis any organized state derived army could have laid waste to fuedal europe.
The very nature of the fuedal system virtually garuntees defeat against a large homogonous force.

for medieval europe, it would say it was the swiss who would get that title.

i agree about the 1700-1900 british army.

the wermahct and the ww2 americans

and the NVA/viet cong

posted on Oct, 6 2009 @ 07:50 PM
my two cents:

In terms of the Great Conquers:
-Persian Empire(s): At certain Points extending from Indus River, to northern Central Asia, eastern China, West Asia, part of southern Russia (European), parts of Ancient Greece, Egypt

-Roman Empire(s): Don't know much but I known they been at the center of power in Europe for almost ever, to the Border of Persia many times too. Powerful.

-Alexander (King of Greek-Macedonian Empire): Ancient Greece to Central Asia, West Asia, Indus River, and Egypt. Short lived, but Incredible.

:the outcomes on both sides on Alexander vs Porus are assumed.. we know that Porus received vastly augmented Gold reserves, and Territory doubled. Alexander left shortly after.

-Kingdoms of India: Maurya Empire - Chandragupta defeated Seleucus, marries his daughter, cemented an alliance, gifted with parts of eastern Persia, Afghanistan (going further North in Central Asia), and now controlled all of India.

-Russian Empire/Soviet Union: Bloated and inefficient at times, but again a remarkable Power. A vast territory and hard to cover esp back in the day!

-The Mongols: Already well known. Mongol and Turkish elite with a mixed Central Asian cavalry.

-Ottoman Empire: Extended at various points from west Persia, West Asia, south Russia, Central Europe, Greece, & forays into Roman territory, Egypt

And The Vikings, The Goths, The Celts, The Huns, The Slavs, Chinese Kingdoms, Egyptian Kingdoms, Babylon- Best of the Best!

Too many to name!!

*My Fav*
Scythian-Saca (Sarmatian, Alans, etc): People originally from eastern Persia, and some parts of what is now North India (Punjab, Kashmir), and also Afghanistan (Southern Central Asia). Scythians were pushed further north as a result of the growing power of the Persian statehood emerging in around 800-700BC.

The Scythians as a result then expanded further north into Central and East Asia, and Southern Russia (They Spoke an East Iranian Language very close to Persian, and known they spoke Indo-Aryan Dialects. Their religious worship practices are mostly the same from Vedic Tradition (India))

Long story short... From 700BC to 150AD - The Scythians were Inside and On the borders Persia and India (Central Asian region) extending into China and Mongolia, Siberia, into Russia, and then Ukraine.

In the later part of the time frame of their history, they were close to Vienna, and were in Romania, Thrace, and the Western Caucasus (Fighting off the Persians and assisting them other times) . They also made it as far into Egypt, through Assyria and Israel, and also made incursions into Northern Greece and Roman cities for brief periods.

The Roman Emperor was so impressed with them that in 125AD he sent a Sarmatian contingent of 5000 to Roman Britain to help fight off other Tribes. They eventually settled a couple of Colonies (Ribchester, Lancashire in 300AD). I have a few books lol!

The Scythians, were partly taken over in that time frame by their sister tribe the Sarmatians, which split into other sister tribes (Alans, Rhoxolani)

Then around 300-500AD when the Huns assumed their tactics, refined them and started conquering central Asia and Russia from them. They were destroying their power structure, so some fled further into Central and South Asia, southern Caucasus, and mostly into Central Europe.

The Huns kept chasing them, so they fled further into Western Europe. and made alliances with other tribes like the Goths, and then later the Vandals (German tribe). They all took part in "the Great Migration".

They saved the Vandals and helped defeat the Franks, and settled in west Germany extending into Gaul (France), Spain, Portugal, and part of North Africa, setting up colonies.

Eventually these tribes started assimilating in numbers around 700DAD-1400AD when new powers formalized lasting alliances, and spreading integrated diverse cultures.

[edit on 6-10-2009 by jonob25]

posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:01 PM
If ever aliens were to come out and attack humanity openly, Id say go back in time and get all of the ancient super armies and kick there butts. Alexander, Gangus Khan, the Huns, Spartacus, etc.

posted on Nov, 6 2009 @ 01:08 PM
reply to post by ShadowXIX

nope Mongols always outnumber their enemies....

posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:12 PM

Originally posted by nathraq
I would vote for the Romans, just because of the pure discipline of their soldiers.

The Mongols were a horde; there were no organized battle plans. They just swarmed over all they met. Mounted Archers on horseback had a devastating effect at the time, to their credit.

A common misconception of the Mongols. They were skilled warriors and used great strategy as well. They were actually disciplined when necessary and were the first force to use psychological warfare as a main weapon. They could be the "Mongol Horde" raping and destroying a city, but more often than not, the mere mention that they might do that to a city, caused the city to capitulate without a blow even being landed.

It's hard to compete with the efficiency of the Mongols. Genghis Khan and Subutai were the most potent one two punch ever.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in